I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

CODESA.

Old Nat party and allies sent in the most inept useless feckers to ever sit at a negotiating table.Done on purpose, I believe.

Ths SA Constitution is full of holes, esp. regarding power to the state.

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

The president is being recalled because he faces corruption charges. One last step towards normalcy and a functioning state. All thanks to democratic processes that is upheld by the best constitution in the world.

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

The president is being recalled because he faces corruption charges. One last step towards normalcy and a functioning state. All thanks to democratic processes that is upheld by the best constitution in the world.

But that relies on the judicial arm being strong enough to combat executive and legislative power being give to one person every 5/10 years. Precarious to say the least, and crying out for one of these dictators to start imprisoning judges etc.

What are the chances of the old bastard seeing the inside of a courtroom for a fair trial before prison?

Quote:

The mixed messages over President Jacob Zuma's overdue exit from public office are akin to a psychoanalytic symptom, the manifestation of an amorphous, deep and confused malaise.

Discussion is the medium through which all the different parties – primarily Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa, with the ANC NEC and NWC as part players in the mental drama – act as each other's therapists in helping to understand their innermost desires while reconciling them with reality.

This is not just about the transfer of power; it is also about mutual transference. Without this, there can be no progress. Unsurprisingly, this semi-public therapy process between Zuma and Ramaphosa remains unpredictable.

Instead of prescribing what each ought to do, as so much of our public commentary does, it is the "is" that is important. That is, how each of the parties perceives each other and their motives. It is this that will determine the outcome.

The risks of a no-confidence motion

The prospects of a no-confidence debate, or even an impeachment process in Parliament, are real constraints on Ramaphosa, since he cannot know whether he enjoys the unqualified support of the full caucus. With a "secret ballot" now established as potential precedent, he cannot even be sure of the support of capricious opposition parties, in whose interest it is that Zuma remains in office.

For Zuma a no-confidence motion is equally risky. So it serves as a stick that narrows the options of the parties for the transition between the 5th and 6th administrations, as Zuma's potential recall is so euphemistically called. Without the parties finding each other, progress in ending "the transition" will be even slower.

It has been argued that Zuma is holding out for some kind of a deal on the infamous 783 counts within 18 charges levelled against him, and potential future charges that may arise out of "state capture" corruption investigations committed by his proxies and associates, amongst whom are the Gupta Brothers Inc.

That Ramaphosa cannot grant Zuma indemnity from prosecution is legally clear. Zuma knows that he cannot legally receive amnesty on prosecution. For him, the game is more complex and "fruitful and constructive" deliberations amongst them continue.

All the while, NPA head Shaun Abrahams has played himself into an unpredictable position – from Zuma's perspective. The decision to prosecute Zuma or not could conceivably be after #Zexit. With a new state president, a pliable NPA head will be as obsequious to the new powers as he was to the previous one.

However, should the prosecution eventuate, the court case on these 783 counts will not be quick. Proving such a case, as the instances of Schabir Shaik and Jackie Selebi show, is a slow and tedious process of presenting micro-detailed evidence with equal and opposite cross examination. Defence council, skilled in the art of vexatious deceleration, could further delay the final outcome.

But even when the day of judgment arrives, there are years of appeals ahead, which means that Zuma could well be in his eighties by the time a jail sentence is confirmed. The courts might be unlikely to send an old man to jail and he will retire to Nkandla, with a possible fine paid for by his friends from their proceeds of crime.

The same logic would apply to any new charges that might be levelled against Zuma arising out of the grand corruption surrounding the Guptas and others. Zuma probably sees the court cases as an inconvenience rather than a final outcome, anyway.

So, what would be his deepest concern in all of this? Ultimately it is not just about himself. It's about his son and bagman, Duduzane. The attempts to obstruct, delay and bargain are probably linked to a search for a way to insulate his son from the consequences of his actions as a Gupta associate. Zuma will probably throw everyone else involved in this sorry scandal under the bus in order to protect his son. Those others however, need Zuma to remain in office to immunise and shield them.

So, from Ramaphosa's perspective, he will see Zuma as gaming the legal system, while simultaneously, he has to be seen to be letting the law take its course. Otherwise, he risks eroding his credibility.

This process cannot be rushed, because Ramaphosa is aware of a range of dynamics that are probably not in the public domain. Indicative of this is the sudden arrival of Black First Land First troops at Luthuli House. This may seem trivial, but a small group, hell bent on instigating public violence, can catalyse dynamics that increase violence exponentially through the country. Ramaphosa has to keep an eye on that in his dealings with Zuma. It is not that he is too cautious or cowardly, Ramaphosa knows more than the armchair advisors.

Peaceful transition key to resuscitating economy

His approach to dealing with #Zexit peacefully is actually the key to dealing with the other great headache he will have when, not if, he assumes office – resuscitating the economy. Sporadic violence, public protests against his presidency and a persistent campaign to undermine him from within will prevent the creation of the stability that he needs to build upon the goodwill already built, to get the economy going in the right direction. Prudence with a longer-term view, rather than short-term haste to satiate public demands, explains the basis of this approach.

For different reasons, the ANC, for Zuma and Ramaphosa, is incidental. Their respective destinies have been set by the ANC and voters in 2019 will decide on the ANC's destiny. They are both now trying to pursue their deeper agendas within their ambits of power and through action. Hence, the symptoms of uncertainty, anxiety and fear for the future.

We need to be clear that Zuma is not essentially simply seeking "immunity from prosecution". The consequences of the "discussions" between Ramaphosa and Zuma, and what concessions Zuma extracts in exchange for his vacating the office of the President of the Republic, could potentially be worse than we imagine.

Knowing that immunity from prosecution for himself and his proxies is impossible – another way of immunisation from prosecution is necessary, other than prolonged due process. This then leaves open the expectation by Zuma that this can only happen through the continued manipulation of institutions, systems and processes, not via the figment of a formal 'guarantee of immunity from prosecution' or a later presidential pardon (which is premised on an admission of guilt and legal culpability for corruption, which he will be keen to avoid).

So, Zuma's one bargaining chip will be to try and get Ramaphosa to agree to circuitous and tortuous delays in ensuring that cases against him are not processed and prosecuted – that's likely the guarantee that he seeks which can only happen IF and when there is wholesale manipulation of processes, institutions, systems and appointments in government – especially in the criminal justice cluster. What Zuma might be seeking is basically a continuation of a mode of politics and governance that imitates his disastrous style.

Managing the aftermath

In the short term, for Ramaphosa, this might mean keeping Jacob Zuma in office rather than implicate himself in the ignominy of meddling with processes and hollowing our institutions. But it does mean that by the end of Zuma's term, there may be no institutions of any worth left to preside over and he would literally have to reconstruct democratic governance systems from scratch.

Executive-minded government, based on a crude interpretation of "majoritarian views" is a real train of thought in the ANC. Rule by executive decree and the crude implementation of a majority view – whether moral or immoral, right or wrong – it is argued, is better for socio-economic development. The argument goes that in such systems, once a majority decision is taken, all that matters is efficiency in its execution and implementation. This kind of thinking around government and governance is anathema to a developmental democracy or a democracy that is developmental – and it effectively means subverting our current constitutional system of governance

The issue in the transition between the 5th and 6th administrations, as Ramaphosa calls it, is therefore not that Zuma wants Ramaphosa to give him what he knows is not Ramaphosa's to give. It is that he seeks an entrenchment of government and rule through institutional decay, system manipulation, process subversion and procedural irregularity – which means that the political and governance vices of informality, impunity and unaccountability entrench themselves. This undermines both the rule of law, and the rule by law.

So, whatever the eventual outcome of the "fruitful and constructive" discussions between Zuma and Ramaphosa, the potential resignation of uBaba and the subsequent continuation, entrenchment and consolidation of a form of rule that subverts the Constitution, are what our real fears should be about. This is where our vigilance should be trained on – probably well into Ramaphosa's term.

- Sarakinsky is the academic director of the Wits School of Governance. Fakir is Director of Programs at the Auwal Socio-Economic Research Institute (asri), part time lecturer at the Wits School of Governance and serves on the board of directors of Afesis-Corplan.

And then to add fuel to the fire, his wife (or one of them at least), had some interesting things to say on her Instagram:

Quote:

Johannesburg – President Jacob Zuma's wife Tobeka Madiba-Zuma whose husband's future in the Presidency is uncertain, on Friday finally broke her silence, warning that all hell was about to break loose.

In the post she praises Zuma, calling him by his clan names before warning that all hell is about to break loose.

She also cautions against "picking a fight with someone who is not fighting you".

Responding to comments on the photo from seemingly unhappy South Africans, Madiba-Zuma, reiterates her warning about rough times ahead and defends her husband.

"Kusazoshipha ukotshi darling. UMsholozi did not join the ANC in 1991, jumped ship nor hip hopped between the struggle and wealth accumulation. He left home at a tender age to fight apartheid. He was prepared to pay the ultimate price. He will finish what he started because he does not take orders beyond the Atlantic Ocean #mattersofthestomach (sic)."

Now why the fcuk can't this be merged with the SA politics thread? You guys would dominate the political threads, right now our Prime Minister getting done up the duff has more pages than your actual politics thread ffs!

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Now why the fcuk can't this be merged with the SA politics thread? You guys would dominate the political threads, right now our Prime Minister getting done up the duff has more pages than your actual politics thread ffs!

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

This is quite a big deal for South Africans, and the future of our presence on this forum.

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Cyril Ramaphosa will [probably] replace him. It might depend on how he is taken out (simple recall by the ANC, motion of no confidence in parliament etc.).

The biggest problem isn't who is in charge though. Cyril isn't an angel but he's the second best the ANC has got (Mathews Phosa would've been a much better president).

The problem is, that there's still a significant Zuma faction within the ANC. So no matter who is in charge, there will either have to be one helluva purge within the ANC which is unlikely to happen, or we will still have the 'Zuma' problem, although it probably would not be as prominent.

The ANC has a bit of a dilemma, as I've previously eluded. Cyril is already getting flack for the time it's taking to get rid of the thief-in-command. But there's also neigh on 50% support for Zuma and his cronies. Ramaphosa needs to try and negotiate the best possible exit deal for JZ (which does NOT include immunity), whilst still keeping the faith of those who elected him as president of the ANC.

This could not have come at a worse time for the ANC as we're just over a year away from the next National Elections, where the ANC themselves have already predicted their support to fall under the 50% mark. This opens up the possibility for a coalition-led government lead by the current opposition parties.

The ANC simply do not have the time to get their house in order before the election campaigning starts. On top of that, they could alienate the Zuma faction if this "Zexit" isn't handled properly. If Zuma gets off too lightly though, they run the serious risk of a break in the tripartite alliance (ANC, Commies and Unions). The Commies have already indicated they could go into the elections on their own if Zuma isn't dealt with in a satisfactory manner; in fact, they have already contested one by-election on their own.

They're in a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario right now.

So it's not so much about who is taking over from JZ right now, it's the way the hand-over is done. The time it takes. And then try to immediately try and regain votes already lost, as well as try to keep those still voting for the ANC (especially the Zuma fans).

I think the ANC is probably pissed off with themselves right now for not acting sooner. Much, much sooner.

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

The president is being recalled because he faces corruption charges. One last step towards normalcy and a functioning state. All thanks to democratic processes that is upheld by the best constitution in the world.

He's being recalled because he will be a negative influence for the ANC during the next elections. He faced corruption charges before but ANC voters didn't care then and elected him twice.Plus the Ramamphosa supporters wants Zuma and his supporters removed so they can get their change at the trough, although in a less blatant way, at least at first.

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Cyril Ramaphosa will [probably] replace him. It might depend on how he is taken out (simple recall by the ANC, motion of no confidence in parliament etc.).

not sure about that: his completion of the remaining year of Zuma's term would probably count as a term in office and he can serve only 2 terms. more likely to have a stand-in president until the 2019 election.

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Cyril Ramaphosa will [probably] replace him. It might depend on how he is taken out (simple recall by the ANC, motion of no confidence in parliament etc.).

not sure about that: his completion of the remaining year of Zuma's term would probably count as a term in office and he can serve only 2 terms. more likely to have a stand-in president until the 2019 election.

remember when Motlanthe stood in after Mbeki resigned?

Lindiwe Sisulu. To be deputy prez after 2019 GEs. (if they survive ...)

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Cyril Ramaphosa will [probably] replace him. It might depend on how he is taken out (simple recall by the ANC, motion of no confidence in parliament etc.).

not sure about that: his completion of the remaining year of Zuma's term would probably count as a term in office and he can serve only 2 terms. more likely to have a stand-in president until the 2019 election.

Seriously tho if that fucktard left tomorrow would he replacement be much better? Snap elections?

Cyril Ramaphosa will [probably] replace him. It might depend on how he is taken out (simple recall by the ANC, motion of no confidence in parliament etc.).

not sure about that: his completion of the remaining year of Zuma's term would probably count as a term in office and he can serve only 2 terms. more likely to have a stand-in president until the 2019 election.

remember when Motlanthe stood in after Mbeki resigned?

No it doesn't, he could still serve two terms.

caught the arse-end of some academic on the radio who differs - it was his view i am repeating

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

Bit of a drawback of the parliamentary system in general when you have one dominant party is it not?

There's a possibility that you might have to wait quite a while longer.

It seems that even if the NEC decides to recall him, he still needs to resign, which he can refuse to do.

The ANC will then have to get rid of him through parliament, which means they will have to join the EFF and DA, which would be embarrassing to them, as it will the current leadership (especially Ramaphosa) look weaker. And if he's removed via parliament, the whole cabinet will be resolved and we'll have that wonderful Madam Speaker as interim president.

And in a worst case scenario.....Zuma might survive such a motion of no confidence

I'm sure there must be reasons, so how has the SA constitution managed to box itself into a system of government in which its electorate have no say in who will be the next person with seemingly unfettered dictatorial powers to 'represent' and rape the country?

Bit of a drawback of the parliamentary system in general when you have one dominant party is it not?

Even more so when that one party puts itself ahead of the country, and the individual members are not allowed to vote outside party line in something like a motion of no confidence.

Autocratic government. By moving away from the electoral representation (downwards accountability ré constituents, as it was) interposing downwards AND upwards accountability (ré The Party as much as for the broader constituency the ANC ensured that the central party apparatchiks over rule the voters in all areas.

From reading various articles, and following the press briefing by the bigger opposition parties, a very possible outcome could be:

The NEC decides to recall Zuma.

Zuma refuses to resign, despite the recall.

Parliament then has to get rid of Zuma (motion of no confidence).

Opposition parties can then call for a vote to have the whole National Assembly dissolved, which would require a simple majority vote (201 votes out of 400). If this succeeds, we'll need to have a national election within 90 days.

In an election where parties only have 3 months to prepare, I don't think the ANC will be in the best position possible; or at least the opposition parties will be much better prepared. This could further decrease the ANC's percentage of votes.

Autocratic government. By moving away from the electoral representation (downwards accountability ré constituents, as it was) interposing downwards AND upwards accountability (ré The Party as much as for the broader constituency the ANC ensured that the central party apparatchiks over rule the voters in all areas.

This is essentially the biggest problem.

While we're sitting on the edge of our chairs waiting for the ANC's NEC to (hopefully) oust Zuma, it is actually indicative of the state of our "democracy".....the mere fact that the fate of the country is being decided by internal struggles within, and by the ANC. Not the voters.

I am honestly getting more and more respect for Julius Malema; for all his faults, he says it like it is. From the media briefing by the opposition parties that ended a couple of minutes ago, and I quote:

Our Honourable Commander-in-Chief wrote:

Malema says they don't want two elite factions from the ANC to nominate a replacement president. "Only the masses must decide," he says. "To think when Zuma leaves our problems will disappear, that is being disingenuous."

***************************************

Malema: "They want Zuma to go because it's time for Cyril's group to eat. Transition? From what? It's factions swopping seats. It's swopping. There is no transition taking place. Factions are swopping."

***************************************

Malema says that why people like ANC MP Derek Hanekom have become so vocal. "They are dancing, they want their turn to eat."